Sexson? Uhhhh . . .

by JT Jordan on Jul 25, 2007 11:46 AM PDT

Ken Rosenthal's Article mentions that we could trade Matt Morris to the Mariners for Richie Sexson, and it would be beneficial for both sides.

Does this make much sense to you, and if you had the opportunity, would you make the deal?

Doing that trade just seems to sort of go against what Sabes and management has been talking about. I say no to the deal, unless they're part of a package. Perhaps I'm just too intent on prying Wlademir Balentien from them . . .

For now, I'm thinking this rumor is just another one of those "Armando Benitez for Pat Burrell" trades that was being thrown about.

This FanPost is reader-generated, and it does not necessarily reflect the views of McCovey Chronicles. If the author uses filler to achieve the minimum word requirement, a moderator may edit the FanPost for his or her own amusement.

Tweet Comment 19 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Re: Sexson? Uhhhh . . .

Shameless plug, I wrote about this a little on my site this morning.

http://www.baycityball.com/2007/07/25/richie-rumors/

I don't like Sexson's chances for being a good player in 2008.

Don't trade for Sexson, plz.

by xanthan on Jul 25, 2007 11:43 AM PDT reply actions

Re: Sexson? Uhhhh . . .

Also, warning. Lots of nerdy stats in that article.

by xanthan on Jul 25, 2007 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions

Seattle has other talent

The two teams apparently are not talking, but a Sexson-for-Matt Morris trade would make sense. Morris, also signed through next season, has struggled of late. Then again, Sexson is batting just .204.

If Sabean is talking trade with Seattle please be for younger, less expensive talent. Once he gets off the phone with Mariners he should also call the Angels and see what good young talent is available playing the two AL West contenders off each other.

by wilriv21 on Jul 25, 2007 11:56 AM PDT reply actions

Re: Sexson? Uhhhh . . .

He's not as good as he used to be, but his horror show of a season is almost all BABiP. He still has a good home run rate and he still draws walks. Of course, he also still can't run or play the field worth a damn. I'd rather have Sexson than Morris, but not for an extra $4.5 million, which is the difference in their salaries.

The goal should be to take on Sexson's salary as part of the payment for Balentien or Clement.

by Evan on Jul 25, 2007 11:57 AM PDT reply actions

Re: Sexson? Uhhhh . . .

Sexson barely makes sense for a "buy" team right now (maybe the Yanks or Braves), let alone the Giants. Why on earth would we do a deal like that?

Thankfully, it sounds like fairly baseless speculation to me. What I'm more worried about is that the "teams apparently are not talking"- uh, why? Balentien! Jones! Make it so.

***

Succumb to the Enchanted t-shirt! Adopted dad of Minor Izzy

by hairball on Jul 25, 2007 12:11 PM PDT reply actions

Sexon is Old

I don't think that this would be a wise trade for us. I mean I thought we were suppose to be going after young talent that we could develope in our farm symstem?!? If we were going to trade with Seattle, then we should go after one of their top prospects.

Adam Jones, of (Great Speed and Arm)
Jeff Clement, c (Power Hitting Catcher)
Brandon Morrow, rhp (Mid-Upper 90's Fastball)
Tony Butler, lhp (Amazing Curve)

Tim Lincecum is my idol.

by NolaGiant on Jul 25, 2007 3:57 PM PDT reply actions

Re: Sexon is Old

REALLY REALLY not going to happen unless the first name in our trade offer starts with Tim or Matt
not going to happen at reasonable price
NOT GOING TO HAPPEN
injured and shut down for the season.

Do you think we can trade Matt Morris for Albert Pujols?

Flossing a dead horse

by kenshin1 on Jul 25, 2007 4:07 PM PDT up reply actions

Not anymore after last night's start

by wilriv21 on Jul 25, 2007 4:08 PM PDT up reply actions

Re: Sexon is Old

There's no way I would trade TIMMAY.

Tim Lincecum is my idol.

by NolaGiant on Jul 25, 2007 4:32 PM PDT up reply actions

Re: Sexon is Old

Tim Flannery and Matt Morris? It's a deal!

by Skaldheim on Jul 26, 2007 11:12 AM PDT up reply actions

Re: Sexon is Old

You're forgetting Wladimir Balentien

by giants92388 on Jul 25, 2007 8:33 PM PDT up reply actions

Re: Sexson? Uhhhh . . .

Seattle is interested in Morris, and the Giants have been interested in Sexson in the past, and the writer put two and two together and wound up with five. The Giants were interested in Sexson in the past when they were buyers, but they are buyers no more. Any trade with the Mariners would be for a prospect, I'm pretty sure of that.

Randy Messenger: "I may not be pretty, but look at that 1.84 ERA!!"

by rxmeister on Jul 25, 2007 6:35 PM PDT reply actions

NO!

Absolutely not. There is no theoretical gain for the Giants. Merely making a trade because it's legal is not helpful if it doesn't add value.

Angels fly because they take Brian Sabean lightly.

by Mayor of 311 on Jul 25, 2007 8:36 PM PDT reply actions

Re: Sexson? Uhhhh . . .

As Evan said, it makes sense if taking on Sexson greases the wheels in acquiring on of the Mariner's top prospects. Adding Sexson wouldn't really matter that much to the Giants, who have no 1B prospects to speak of, aren't going to be held back from the playoffs if Sexson falls on his face again next season, and aren't really going to be hurt on the field by the payroll hit. Also, a rebound by Sexson would (not likely) spur the 2008 Giants to contention or (more likely) provide them with a pretty significant trade piece at the deadline.

Again, as long as the Mariners sweeten the pot with a prospect (the Giants would be agreeing to "take out the Mariner's trash" after all), it makes alot of sense for this team.

Fool me seven times, shame on you. Fool me eight or more times, shame on me.

by Bhaakon on Jul 26, 2007 2:30 AM PDT reply actions

Re: Sexson? Uhhhh . . .

Yeah, this I'm cool with. Morris for Sexson and Balentien would be awesome.

Barry Zito: Mike Hampton with a guitar

by JakeS on Jul 26, 2007 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions

Re: Sexson? Uhhhh . . .

I made this point a day or two ago in either in one of Grant's posts or in a diary. I doubt the Mariners would just give up a prospect for Morris just to rid themselves of Sexson's deal in the process. So the question becomes, what other prospect would make the deal fair for Seattle? What would make the deal fair for SF?

I threw up the idea of including either Sanchez or Misch, as the Mariners may see that as potentially equal. Problem is, I don't know if it's that fair for SF.

by sfgfan on Jul 26, 2007 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions

Re: Sexson? Uhhhh . . .

I don't know, it wouldn't be the biggest head-scratcher Bavasi has pulled in the last 12 months.

Fool me seven times, shame on you. Fool me eight or more times, shame on me.

by Bhaakon on Jul 26, 2007 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions

Re: Sexson? Uhhhh . . .

Ugh. I had Sexson in my fantasy team earlier this year, so I got to look his horrific stats in my inbox every morning. That is, until I got tired of seeing his average and power numbers look like mine----in 9th grade PE.

Which, of course, is why I pay to get into the ballpark and not the other way around.

Just think of this: Sexson=the newer Dave Kingman.

by Van Smack on Jul 26, 2007 12:40 PM PDT reply actions